We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants



Forgotten password?


Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 35 (2020), No. 2     10. Mar. 2020
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 35 (2020), No. 2  (10.03.2020)

Page 330-341, doi:10.11607/jomi.7541, PubMed:32142570

A Multilevel Analysis of Platform-Switching Flapless Implants Placed at Tissue Level: 4-year Prospective Cohort Study
Prati, Carlo / Zamparini, Fausto / Pirani, Chiara / Montebugnoli, Lucio / Canullo, Luigi / Gandolfi, Maria Giovanna
Purpose: To evaluate the factors affecting peri-implant marginal bone level of single platform-switched implants with a smooth neck placed at gingival level (tissue level) using a flapless technique.
Materials and Methods: Consecutive healthy patients requiring dental implant rehabilitations were enrolled in this study. Titanium implants with a zirconium-oxide–blasted surface and a platform-switch neck tulip configuration were used. Loading was performed 3 months after insertion with a provisional resin crown and after approximately 15 days with a definitive ceramic crown. Peri-implant marginal bone level (MBL) was measured on periapical radiographs at 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 months by a blinded assessor. The following parameters were evaluated: location (maxillary/mandibular), position (anterior/posterior), sex (male/female), smoke (yes/no), implant placement timing (immediate, early, delayed), gingival thickness (thin/thick), endodontically treated adjacent teeth (yes/no), and diameter (3.8/4.25/5.0 mm). Multilevel analyses exploring factors associated with MBL at 36 and 48 months were performed.
Results: A total of 76 patients (42 women, 34 men; mean age: 55.6 ± 10.7 years) received 128 implant rehabilitations. The survival rate was 98.4%. MBL displayed an initial increase during the first months from insertion (preload period). Cumulative mean MBL at T48 was 0.99 ± 0.68, which was not statistically significant from the values at T24 to T36 (P > .05). Mandibular location, delayed implants, and presence of adjacent endodontically treated teeth showed higher bone loss at 36 months (P < .05). Interestingly, at 48 months, only implant placement timing showed statistically significant differences. Delayed implants showed increased bone loss compared with both early and immediate groups (P < .05). Multilevel analysis confirmed the statistical significance of implant location (P = .031; 95% CI: 0.031 to 0.659), endodontically treated adjacent teeth (P = .001; 95% CI: –1.228 to 0.859), and implant placement (P = .045; 95% CI: 0.003 to 0.337) as factors affecting MBL at 36 months. All the investigated parameters, with the only exception being the implant placement group (P = .020; 95% CI: 0.334 to 1.432), were not statistically significant at 48 months (P > .05).
Conclusion: Platform-switched implants placed nonsubmerged with a flapless approach showed a reduced bone loss progression in the first 4 years, as MBL remained stable at longer times (36 and 48 months). Implants placed with early and immediate timing showed reduced bone loss compared with delayed implants.

Keywords: best clinical practice, dental implants, flapless surgery, MBL, platform-switch